All I know are other people's opinions, like the usual statements on Ultrasones having recessed mids. (How recessed is another question...

Depends on the can in question - there's a lot of stereotyping/casttyping that goes on (and not just with Ultrasone), but it really depends on *which* Ultrasone. The 2400 and 2900 are not really recessed imho, the 900 are somewhat recessed - the "cast-type" is that the 2900 are a huge V, and the 900 have no mids and only produce 20-200hz and nothing else, but honestly it's a lot of hyperbole.

900 have no mids and only produce 20-200hz and nothing else, but honestly it's a lot of hyperbole.

BUT if it's on the interwebs it must be TRUE

But yea... I think the Pro 900 is only worth buying to produce those frequancies xD. Still I'm TRYING HARD. TO get a used dt 990 pro... I might break dwn and buy it new since I REALLY FREAKING want one... and tube amps solve ur lack of mid issues [at least with smexy byer cans ;3]

Originally Posted by obobskivich
Depends on the can in question - there's a lot of stereotyping/casttyping that goes on (and not just with Ultrasone), but it really depends on *which* Ultrasone. The 2400 and 2900 are not really recessed imho, the 900 are somewhat recessed - the "cast-type" is that the 2900 are a huge V, and the 900 have no mids and only produce 20-200hz and nothing else, but honestly it's a lot of hyperbole.

And that's why I prefer to have ears-on experience.

The HE-400 has been type-cast before as having a significant V, but it honestly didn't sound like that to me. The vocals weren't completely shoved into the background like some cans tend to do. The different pads might have something to do with it; my audition was with velours.

Then there's the supposed Sennheiser "veil", Stax (and 'stats in general) having "no bass", Grados having "fake detail through exaggerated treble", so on and so forth. Blanket brand statements don't really work due to the variances between models; I certainly wouldn't expect an AD700 and M50 to sound even remotely alike just because they're both Audio-Technica offerings. All we can really do is discuss headphones on an individual basis. (And even that gets complicated if the headphone model in question gets very different revisions masquerading as the same headphone...)

On top of this, we have to consider the poster's biases. People prefer different things, and what's acceptable to them may not be acceptable to others. This takes some further research, but can reveal a lot between the lines, like how someone is naturally going to recommend headphones in line with their desired presentation, regardless if their expectations match those asking for recommendations in the first place. Just knowing if a given poster's tastes match up with yours or not can make all the difference. (That makes things very hard for me, since I've found that I like a midrange that puts vocals front and center with nothing unnatural-sounding over them, but a lot of other people crave bass and treble more than anything. Finding a headphone that can strike a balance between them without EQ, and especially without being prohibitively expensive, is very difficult.)